Tom Neal

But would this "undercharged" bullet only penetrate less than the length of Humes little finger? Tom

Chris, I believe you are postulating a 2nd headshot that was excised from the film, or are you saying the first and only headshot was moved 30 feet back up mainstreet? Thanks, Tom

Chris, I find your 'math' posts quite interesting, so I hope you won't take this as knocking your efforts. As you are obviously interested in attaining the greatest degree of accuracy possible, I submit that while the 'Hess Eisenhardt measurements' use the flexion of the tires and the seat cushions, and state dimensions to the second decimal place they are unaware of, or are ignoring a simple fact that could render their 52.78" calculation in error by several inches. JFK at a standing height of 6' 1/2" does not necessarily have the same SITTING height as another individual of the same standing height. As an example, my two sons are both 73" tall while standing, but there is a 2.75" difference in their heights while sitting. Please continue sharing your fine work with the group. Tom

Robert, The limo was brought back to DC aboard an AF C-130. According to SA Sam Kinney, on the flight back to DC he personally discovered a large part of the "rear part" of JFK's head lying on the back seat "exactly where Clint Hill said it was." Kinney further states that he brought this large skull fragment back to DC in the pocket of his suitcoat. He then turned it over to his "good friend" Admiral George Berkley. I've often wondered where it went from there... Tom

I get a big kick out of the idea that J. Edgar Hoover--of all people on the planet!--would have wanted to frame an INNOCENT Lee Harvey Oswald for the two murders in Dallas in November 1963. In reality, of course, Hoover would have probably been about the LAST person in America who would have wanted to frame Oswald. And everybody here should know why that is so. Just think about it for a couple of minutes and maybe the light bulb will go on. JEH, of all the people on the planet? Because he is THE paragon of justice? You have to be the only one on this planet or any other that still think this of JEH. That is the most absurd argument I've ever heard. DVP, I'm not waiting for your light bulb to come on as you obviously don't even HAVE a light bulb... Tom

JEH alone controlled all the evidence. DPD was removed from the investigation on day 1 - Fritz/Curry said nothing contrary to what the WC would eventually conclude. Alleged 'need' fulfilled... Tom

And of course we ALL know that JEH's FBI never framed anyone... Keep up the GREAT stuff, Jim! Tom

Hello Dawn, I'm not challenging your assertion, I'm simply looking for info that he was in fact working solely for CIA, possibly counter to the wishes of RFK. I'm convinced that CIA was leading the attacks on Garrison, but I am confused regarding Walter Sheridan's obvious participation in this operation. Considering his long-term intimate association with RFK, I wondered if perhaps he was 'sandbagging' Garrison to prevent public knowledge of something that would hurt JFK's image, and/or RFK's political ambitions. There had been speculation based on comments, supposedly by RFK, that the assassination could not be completely investigated until RFK was president, so it's possible he didn't want anyone to investigate until then. If his actions were NOT on RFK's behest, couldn't RFK have stopped him? If Sheridan was attacking Garrison solely for CIA, what was his motivation? Thanks for any thoughts, Tom

Well said, Ms. Loney. Give it up David Josephs, you have been soundly defeated. And she did it with class...

LOL With colourful language like that, you would have made a good logger. I'm flattered! [blush...]

Robert, Thanks for elaborating. As a devout reader of your posts I was certain you had it all calculated down to the size of a gnat's arse...but I wanted to be sure that both angles were measured relative to the same reference plane, as I had assumed. Isn't it interesting how someone like Dale Myers can calculate the coordinates of the bullet entrance and exit with such a high degree of precision that according to him, the trajectory line through JFK's head wounds "passed right through the open window" in the sniper's nest? I wonder if a 0.1 degree error in roll, pitch and yaw would cause the trajectory to miss the entire window... Tom

dupe...

Robert P. I understand how the 9 degree angle has been measured. Is the 23 degree angle also measured relative to "a line drawn lengthwise through the limo at roughly z224"? If not, then what angle relative to the limo line would be required to clear the "outer tip of the right transverse process of C7?" Thanks for any info, Tom

Thanks, Greg. It seems reasonable to believe he's telling the truth...in this instance. Thanks! Tom

Jon, thank you for the reply. Did she mention spelling errors? You are referring here to the published WC translation, I presume? IMO Oswald did not make errors in tense when he spoke, so why would he make them when writing? Did your daughter offer an opinion as to whether someone who SPOKE Russian well would make the TYPE of errors made in this letter? Thanks Again for your reply, Tom

Paul, LHO was an intelligent guy, which indicates he most likely had a high IQ, but do you have an actual statement from someone that evaluated him? Presumably, he was tested at some time by the Marine Corps, or even in public school. It would be enlightening to know his actual IQ and how he scored in different test areas. Tom

Paul, I'm not familiar with the Mexican border guards evidence. Could you elaborate? Thanks, Tom

LHO was quite eloquent in English speech, especially for his young age. In comparison his written efforts in English are those you would expect from an illiterate. IMO his spelling errors reflect some sort of disability beyond his less than average formal education. As David Lifton stated, LHO may have been an aural learner by nature, or possibly he was only taught to speak Russian with little or no time and effort spent on the written language. IIRC Oswald's written errors were more in spelling than in grammar. He frequently used the wrong word when the spelling and meaning were different, but when spoken would sound the same. Jon, germane to the above, did your daughter specify what type of errors were made by the author of the note? Considering the following... * like so much OTHER "evidence," the letter was found much later than it should have been * based upon LHO's alleged fear immediately following the shooting, why would LHO save this incriminating letter? * incriminating Lee would be bad for Marina - why would SHE save it? * IF Marina saved it, following the assassination why would she leave it to be found by the police when she could have flushed it down the toilet? ...my personal belief is that Oswald did not write that letter, and Ruth Paine is my number one forgery suspect. BTW, did Michael Paine speak Russian? Tom

Well said, Don. Interesting that "Leon's" companions used their "war names," and only "Oswald" gave his last name. "Leon" is so close to "Lee" I have to wonder why they bothered to change it. Unless of course they wanted to create the impression that Oswald was using a fake name while being certain that the Odios would make the connection to "Lee" if he happened to become well known some time in the near future. It appears that Leon had nothing to contribute to the meeting with Odio, so why was he there? OTOH, the phone call subsequent to the meeting was primarily, if not entirely to depict Leon as a crazy American capable of assassination. It is likely that "Leon" had no knowledge of the phone call. Certainly it would have been more effective to have Leon himself, at the in-person meeting, angrily display the image that was portrayed during the phone call. But if "Leon" was Lee would he have done this? Tom

Both statements may well be true, but I don't think LHO was sending a covert message to the world of an assassination conspiracy. It is possible of course, but IMO the second version fits Ozzie's MO much better. Tom

Seconded. WOW!

Right to the point, Mark. And the issue of attacking a work you haven't read has been covered here many times. Mr Varnell, at the risk of incurring your wrath, you DO seem to be more interested in "picking a fight" with Mr. Parker than discussing the JFK assassination. What is pertinent and what is not will remain an unknown until this mystery has been solved in its entirety. At the present time, anything that concerns the Paine family is certainly appropriate for discussion. Like Paul Brancato, Jon Tidd, Ed LeDoux and others, I find this a worthy topic, and would like to hear whatever information Greg has to share... Tom

Paul, You beat me to it! I agree 100%. The FPCC was VERY successful and much feared by the anti-commies at the time LHO's FPCC affiliation was exposed. The FPCC made much ado about being "non-communist" and tying the "Communist" LHO to them was vital. This of course added to LHO's communist legend - despite the fact that Ozzie made the distinction that he was "a Marxist." The difference between the two was ignored. Considering the company he was keeping at the time, it seems pretty reasonable that this anti-FPCC op was suggested to him... Following the assassination and Oswald's public "conviction" the FPCC was no longer the force it had been. This was one more reason to use LHO as the "patsy." An even stronger blow to the FPCC. The planners took out JFK *and* the FPCC with a single operation. Another indication of a well-planned professional hit. Interesting that at the late night press conference the night of the assassination, DA Henry Wade linked Oswald to the Free Cuba Committee, but was immediately corrected by none other than Jack Ruby. Why would Ruby not only be aware of Oswald's connection to the FPCC, but spoke out to be certain the media learned this fact unless this FPCC smear was part of the assassination plan and Ruby was well aware of this fact? Tom

Hello Greg, I hope you continue to post here. There are MANY who want to hear what you have to say. Do you know the identity of the individual who is the "recruiter" or "spotter"? Will you be releasing any additional information in the near future, or saving it for a book? Thanks for any thoughts/info, Tom Tom, thanks for the thumbs up. I did only come here to straighten out an individual who was messing with the truth about old posts of mine. Have stayed longer than intended because there are a couple of threads of interests. Yes, I know who the recruiter was. It will all be in volume two of my book, hopefully out later this year. That part is already written, though more players and background to get to. I know it may seem like a strange statement, but the same program that sent him to the Soviet Union, also got him into the TSBD. Except it was a pretext to lure him in there in the latter case. The whole thing with the recruitment and the trip (which had a dual purpose) won't be anything like you might expect. Jon Tidd said the planners had a great knowledge of politicians... that shows keen insight, tho it goes beyond a good knowledge of politicians. Anyone wanting to know why Oswald was in the TT for example, and what his alleged pocket litter was all about, need only brush up on history. Same goes for other, older aspects of the legend. There just happened to be someone holed up in DPD HQ all day of Nov 22 who had a keen knowledge of all the right history - that is - the history that was borrowed and overlaid on Oswald. He also had the right connections... We have been going around in circles for 50+ years because we have accepted far too much on face value. In court, it is common practice to have an agreed set of facts between defense and prosecution as a starting point. We are under no such obligation to accept any of the facts as given by the government, it's agencies, or by Texas officials. Here's one recent and very basic example dug up by a guy named Mick Purdy... The accepted dogma - Wes Frazier took LHO to work every Monday from the time Oswald started at the TSBD. Fact: That's not a certainty by any means. Mick's contention is that Frazier did not take LHO to work on Nov 22, either. There are no witnesses to Oswald walking to the Randle house (though such witnesses were sought), no witnesses to Oswald being in the car except Wes, no witnesses to Oswald walking from the car park. In fact, there are witnesses to Oswald's absence from the car park because Edward Shields told the HSCA investigator sent to interview him that Charles Givens had called out from the other building asking Wes where his rider was. According to Shields, Wes replied that he had dropped Lee at the front entrance. The point is, the whole case needs stripping back and rewriting without any allegiance except to approximate the facts as closely as possible. Hi Greg, Thanks for the reply. A tantalizing post to say the very least. I'm eager to see what you have come up! Tom

Hello Greg, I hope you continue to post here. There are MANY who want to hear what you have to say. Do you know the identity of the individual who is the "recruiter" or "spotter"? Will you be releasing any additional information in the near future, or saving it for a book? Thanks for any thoughts/info, Tom